metro_goldwyn_mayer_cartoonsfandomcom-20200213-history
MGM Cartoons Wiki:Citations
The MGM Cartoons Wiki, and its affiliates, are encyclopedia databases, and usually not publishers of original thought (exceptions are always present). We use material that is attributable to reliable published sources, usually not whether it is true. The MGM Cartoons Wiki and its affiliates are not places to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments, with the exceptions of the userpages, blogs, and forums. While almost everything on the MGM Cartoons Wiki must be attributable, not all material has to be attributed, such as character descriptions or material that can be watched (ending titles). Editors should provide attribution for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, using }}}} or it may be removed. The burden of evidence lies with the editor wishing to add or retain the material. Should an article (except characters/video games with descriptions) not have any reliable sources, then the Looney Tunes Wiki should not have an article on it. In addition to attribution, citations are needed when a questionable statement needs sources for verification. It is very important you add this onto questionable statements. Failure to add citations/sources to a quote or even rewording without crediting is considered plagiarism. Not crediting the original author while copying their content is also plagiarism. Attribution is not only proving something is true with some citations, but also a form of respect to give sources/citations as credits for writing an article on here. Copying from Wikipedia, other Wikia wikis, and other wiki databases licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 license with proper attribution is not plagiarism as the license allows others to reuse the material, although we prefer original writing so it is more creative. Shorts Articles for shorts should have citations for the following: *Awards the short won or was nominated for, such as Academy Awards *Release date *Different video transfers that have edits or altered title cards *A historian/person from Warner Bros./Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer said something about the cartoon (Exception: For commentaries on the DVDs, credit the video set) *Questionable people who worked on the cartoon that are not listed on the credits Characters Character articles should have citations for the following: *New information about them *A description of the character by a historian/person at MGM/WB, example: William Hanna said ..... (what did he say? need citation) TV Shows TV show articles should have citations for the following: *New information about episodes airing *Who worked on the episode, other than on-screen credits *Behind-the-scenes stories (deleted scenes, troubled production, etc.) *Critical reception Reliable vs Unreliable Of course there are many sources that are considered unreliable. To look for a reliable source, consider these things. *Are there photos or videos explaining their information? :*Note that images and videos can be faked! Technology has made it easier for anyone with a computer and the appropriate software to make convincing images and videos. Anyone who knows about the "inspect element" command in web browsers can change the text on, say, CNN, to say anything they want, take a screenshot of it, and post it to the Internet. There are so many possible criteria to go over that the Associates and Supervisors are likely to go by "I know it when I see it." *What is the website trying to convey or explain? Is there proof like picture, video, news article, etc? Someone can make up a Tom and Jerry Movie upcoming sequel post on Facebook when it could really not be true. In that case, you should not cite it. *What kind of website is it? Is it a website to inform? To deliver information? Usually, articles that have a biased nature, sans personal blogs, are not reliable sources. *Who wrote the work? Can you search them up on that website? What have they been writing on the website? Does the source or writer have a history of providing reliable information? :*If the creator of Cartoon Research is writing articles about cartoon research and the writers' work has been proven time and time again to be correct, then it is a reliable source. Skepticism should be applied to pieces by new writers in the field, and it is advised not to use pieces by writers who have a history of providing unreliable information. :*In most cases, if you cannot search up the writer, or if the writer is a red flag (such as by the ToonZone staff), we don't know who wrote this, so it is then most likely an unreliable source. Of course, this isn't true for all cases. :*The official social media page of a staff member working on a project is considered reliable. *Does the article have any citations, references, or works cited? Pictures and video shots from the cartoons themselves count as a reference. *In the cases of social media sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Tumblr, is the post just a screenshot purporting to be from an article? Is the article linked to? A screenshot of an article alone is not a reliable source. Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Be especially careful when sourcing content related to living people. If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history. However, we do not require these sources be used. You may also include sources from books, journals, and quotes if they are properly cited. Editors may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include: *University-level textbooks *Books published by respected publishing houses *Magazines (not biased) *Journals *Mainstream newspapers (not biased) Editors may also use electronic media, subject to the same criteria. Forums and blogs Forums are where people come to collaborate on certain topics. Forums can considered being reliable sources, if they include: *Photos or videos *Photos or video clips of an upcoming episode or upcoming event *A person from the studio talking about upcoming episodes, progress, adding photos, etc Blogs are websites where people can talk about what they like, review a title, or give information to people. Blogs are considered reliable if they include: *Photos or videos *Updated information, blogs that were last updated 20 years ago might not be a reliable source anymore (Though there can be exceptions to these). *Insider information, like experts in their fields. Search them up and also search up what they talk about. If it is not true (after you search) and it is meant to mislead people, then it isn't a reliable source. Images and Videos Images and videos may be consider citations if they are: *a Warner Bros./MGM picture or video *not heavily edited (custom borders, custom drawings, memes) Why You Should Cite Your Sources *To credit a source for providing useful information and to avoid claims of plagiarism. *To show that the edits you make are, preferably, not original research. (there are exceptions to this) (stuff you find in a video doesn't count as original research) *To ensure that the content of articles is credible and can be checked by any reader or editor. *To help users find additional reliable information on the topic. *To improve the overall credibility and authoritative character of the MGM Cartoons Wiki *To reduce the likelihood of editorial disputes, or to resolve any that arise. While we do not ask for an academic citation, we ask that you do not use Wikipedia, other wiki databases, or other Wikia projects as a citation for an article. If you need to list their names, add a External Links section and list them there. Because the MGM Cartoons Wiki and other wikis are all based off of other online and non-online (book, scholarly journal) sources, we ask that if visitors are attributing something they found on our wiki, that they do not credit us, but rather credit the sources we attributed. Failure to use citations for questionable statements will usually result in a warning for the first few times. If this persists, it can result in an anvil drop. Requesting a source After a statement, type }}}. We prefer dates to see when the template was last updated. This way, we can remove information that seems to be unsourced for a long time. Adding references Place the title of the source material between tags. Here is an example for a book: :Bugs Bunny's first cartoon, "A Wild Hare", was nominated for an Academy Award.Maltin, Leonard. Of Mice and Magic: Revised and Updated Edition, pg. 463, Penguin Publishing, 1987 Here is an example for a webpage: :Tom and Jerry will be appearing in the upcoming movie Tom and Jerry.http://www.example.com Do not neglect to place the tag or the template in a header below all other headers, but before the external links and templates, called "References."